[OT] Aural versus ETD tuning training

[Richard Brekne]

Ron Nossaman wrote:
> 
> 
> My point was that the piano, while "common" and "familiar" to a lot of
> pianists, is quite complicated. Pianists aren't going to learn a lot about
> how the instrument works, or doesn't, by playing it. They might or might
> not like what they feel and hear, but they aren't normally going to be able
> to mechanically diagnose it either way.

On the other hand, the relationship the pianist has with the instrument
provides a unique diagnostic tool that many (if not most) pianotechs
lack. A purely mechanical perspective is only one part of the
instruments complexity we all seem to be in agreement about. A
technician may be able to regulate to specifications, or even to some
set of tests that rely to some degree on how the instrument feels. But
the pianist simply plays and expects a certain response. Technicians can
not expect to relate without further ado to this unless they are able to
some degree reach into the pianists world as well. And after all... its
OUR job to provide the pianist with these results. Their job is to make
music. 

> The secondary point was that the pianist trying to get more technically
> specific information from the tech, will get different answers to the same
> question from different techs. This was not the primary point. It was to
> reinforce the observation that pianos are complex. Even members of the
> technical community disagree on what's what, so how are the pianists
> expected to know what their tech may very well not?

Pretty much what I thought you said. And I agree 100 %.

> 
> That's it.
> 
> Ron N
> 
>

Cheers!
RicB

--Happy New Year Sophie my Dear

-- 
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
UiB, Bergen, Norway
mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html